Was asked on another post what I thought a True Videographer was so going to post what I meant, here on a seperate thread so I dont hijack the other thread.

What I felt was that even though I have learned through the film and slide days of photography when you better have the exposures dead on or miss the shot/event, now days many people can get "Acceptable" shots with their digital SLR's and some basic knowladge of Photoshop. Do they get the results I get, probably not, but they work for almost free. I have well over 20K in just cameras and lenses but with the digital picture frame and what we call "Mom With A Camera" It can be hard to justify our prices.

On the other hand video adds some varriables that I believe the "Uncle Joe" will not master. There is the expense of the camera, then the software to edit, then of coarse now the new pc with added drives. Oh yea did I mention the Huge learning curve and that little thing called A U D I O...

I love all of this, and putting in the art of photography, good lighting and captureing emotions.

I feel if someone can learn this trade, he will set himself apart from the norm and not be threatened by every kid who gets a $700 Digital SLR camera for Christmas.

Just a Photographers point of view.

My wife is a professional photographer, so I know where you're coming from . . but honestly the same applies to video in terms of what people know and understand. You see, while video probably has a higher learning curve than photography, most people don't realize this . . and thus they think their friend or family member can do a decent job.

I don't mean to scare you away from videography, but the bigger challenge with videography is that in most markets it's still not considered a necessity for a wedding. Photography has that advantage.

I should also point out that videography doesn't generally pay what it's worth unless you're lucky enough to be in a market that understands it. My wife works really hard at and after a wedding to produce amazing work, but I have to work twice as hard . . charge less . . . and work a lot harder to get someone to book for video.

Again, I don't mean to scare you off, but that IS the reality of working in video. You better LOVE doing it, lol.

Travis I agree with you about the video, but like photography its one of those things you have to educate your market area. What I get for a wedding now was unheard of a few years ago.

I am not booking any video only weddings, but I am booking many photography and video coverage. My customers know what they are getting, and because I am still in the learning phase probably dont charge enough for the addition of video. However you only get the option to add video when you buy my largest package.

I hope after this year I can slowly start charging more for the video coverage. The customers I have booked love the highlights show mixing video with stills and I am the only one offering this in this area. The sad thing is they love this, and it was shot with just the on camera audio from the XH A1, a single camera set up from the back. I hope to make many improvements now that I have 2 XH A1's and a good shotgun and lav mic and much more editing experience behind me.

IMO it makes a huge difference if the person behind the camera whether that be DSLR or Video cam is creative and has an eye for finding things visually that will help communicate the message. Good photographers and videographers don't just look straight ahead to see what they can shoot, they look for emotion and texture. Professionals know to keep a look out on what is happening not only in front of them but behind them and elsewhere. For me creativity does not start at the beginning of the wedding. We have a wedding this Saturday and I have been piecing together shots that I have not even taken. To me, there is a HUGE difference between those that have not taken the time to learn and study and those that have. Ok...off my soap box.
-John

I did a show recently and on our dvd covers/demo running were images my wife took at weddings. Many visitors to our booth were confused as to what we did, because the images were very nice. I wouldn't put us up there with the best photographers in town, but we're no hacks. hehe. We are constantly being told we should do both photo and video. We did a photo and video wedding, and between the two of us, it was a lot of work. I understand why both talents should get a bunch of money.

As mentioned above, both video and photography have curves of their own.
I think soon we will be able to step out and offer both. There's a couple of people in our market that offer both, and from what I can tell, we could compete easily.

In my opinion; you get much more bang for your buck with a quality motion picture than a still. Although a nice still is pleasant to look at. So it's like apples and oranges. As my clients have said, 'After watching my video, I had forgotten most of what happened at my wedding.' And only video can provide this to a client. Unfortunately, this is something non-video brides and grooms only realize after their wedding.

Hi Denny,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. As you call it "Mom with a camera" and "Uncle Joe", they will both always have a place in photography and videography. There will always be brides looking for a cheap deal. I feel it is equally easy to do entry level photo or video, but the outcome is not very professional.

HD may change some of that, but only time will tell. I say that based on the current HD cameras. With SD a person can spend $1500 on a used Sony VX2100, put it in auto and get decent footage, especially of the conditions are right. At least with the current HD cameras, you will not get great results in auto.

The biggest challenge I see to professional videography is price. As a whole, photographers charge much more than videographers. Why is that? Well good quality wedding photography has been around much longer than good quality wedding videography. But that is only part of the problem.

This may not be popular to say, but I feel the biggest problem with wedding videography is the low price we are charging our clients, me included. I don't know too many videographers that are getting what they are worth, but I know many photographers who are.

When the videographer shows up to the wedding and the Bride is only paying him $1500 and then the photographer shows up and she is paying him $3000 plus, she is going to have a lot more respect for her photographer and treat them accordingly.

A majority of wedding videographers are part time. Why is that? Because they don't charge enough money to support their families. I'm not knocking part timers. Many have no desire to do this full time and just enjoy the creative outlet. On the other hand, I know many who would really like to go full time, but can't because they are not charging enough.

If we are going to spend 20-40 hours editing a wedding, we can't charge $1500 and make a profit. So what can we do? Either cut way back on the editing time, or if you want to make that masterpiece, then charge accordingly for it.

I am not pointing this post at anyone in particular, but at our industry as a whole.

Not to hijack this discussion, and I've made these points before in other threads, (some may even appear obvious to photogs and vids), but both stills and video have their place. I wonder how many folks keep in mind that each offers different options and/or restrictions for the client/audience.

This is a generalization, but most times when I've been shown still wedding albums, it's been while sitting on someone's couch or at their kitchen table. I page through the album, while the owner points out/describes who's in the photo, why they were in the photo, and offers what they consider the pertinent points surrounding each photo, i.e. events immediately before or after it was taken. Paging through an album involves some conversation, commentary, and often jokes or memories of how fun the day was. Still photos allow that, and even invite it.

Video is more restrictive and demanding of our senses. It is less portable, i.e. it doesn't easily allow moving from the couch in the living room to the kitchen table for a cup of coffee while regaling someone with anecdotes of the event. It also demands more attention, i.e. if you look away from the screen or blink, some important action might missed. Additionally, because of the sound track, it invites silence (as in a movie-theater setting) and discourages conversation/other interaction among the viewers. (Yes, I know that's one reason they provide remote controls w/FF, REW and SKIP; unfortunately, my experience has been that many people don't make full use of them).

Lastly, no one I know has ever even offered to show me a wedding video.

I don't mean to discourage/disparage wedding shooters or minimize the value of a good video to the B&G or their families; (I've done a few myself). Instead, I want to highlight obstacles to taping weddings, mitzvahs, and other events. (Obstacles which vids must overcome, or at least be aware of, in their marketing). I suspect many of those obstacles are at least unconsciously known or felt by the potential client. Example: many of us own numerous DVDs of movies; I might own as many as 30 to 40, but all of mine were gifts; I've never bought a DVD of a movie. (I'll buy instructional/tutorial DVDs, but not movies). Despite having so many DVDs of movies, I can't recall the last time I watched one of them on DVD. For a movie I don't own, I'll rent a DVD before I buy one. I'm not alone there, either: last week I caught my spouse watching a movie on Pay Per View that we already had the DVD of. Though it was admittedly small, it was $$ out the window. (Considering the forum, am I committing blasphemy or spouting heresy)?

Bottom line, each medium has it's advantages and disadvantages. We need to bear those in mind in our marketing efforts, particularly when facing a potential client who's on the fence or otherwise reluctant to contract for video.

That's my $.02 to the pot.

"Lastly, no one I know has ever even offered to show me a wedding video."

Ok here is an option though, a hightlight video, one that can in the time it takes to listen to a song, see highliths of a wedding.

This is what is selling for me, sure we include a full version DVD, but its these hightlight shows that can be put online, links emailed to friends and family etc.

I have been a full time photographer for a few years and its hard to do that in this area with all the part timers, but I had to quickly seperate myself from the rest. I did this partly with projectiong proofs and showing a slideshow to music showing 20X30 inch images in a very nice presentation room. People love it, and almost always buy a DVD slideshow.

So I feel the mix is here to stay, and until they come out with a video camera that can produce an image as sharp and clear as my Canon 5d or 1D Mark III with a $2000 lens on it I will always get weddings as a photographer. But again with the offering of the highlight show, have got many more upscale weddings, which brings nicer reception halls, churches etc. which makes our job easier to make elegant looking images/video.

I always try and stay on the leading edge of technoligy, and feel it keeps me doing what I love for a living.

I should add the nice thing about offering both is that you keep eachother out of the frame. We work hard to make this happen, and when not possible rely on the other camera angle to be edited in to cover it.

I know many photogs / videographers clash, but usually because they are competing for the shot. I never did, and the only time I worked with a pro, had no problems, we worked well together. Its the cousin laying on the floor right behind the preacher that bugs me. I never use flash during a ceromony and try to be as undetected as possible, and there is Joey laying on the floor with his handy cam, even poping little flashes now and again capturing those stills. :)

Mark,
you nailed exactly what I battle with every day. I am one of those that is only charging 1800 for our full day services and I am full time with this. Looking around in the industry, I do feel that I should be charging more for the quality of work i'm producing and amount of time I put into it, but this market won't support it. Trust me, I wish I could make more. I could raise my prices to 3000 but then I would only book a fraction of the weddings and then I have no money :-) we have videographers ranging from 400-2400 here and that is the problem. If you get to a certain point in your pricing, no matter what the quality, they will just settle with someone cheaper. I've yet to figure out how to combat that. Instead, we're just opening ourselves up a bit for travel and are starting to work in the larger cities a few hours away, des moines, chicago, minneapolis, etc.

I also keep hearing that photographers are starting to add on video because they feel that video is where people are headed. I do see a few booking and wanting to spend more on video than photo, but not enough yet. Unfortunately many businesses doing this are offering less than great quality videos and are just doing it to be a one stop shop. That is hurting too. Not only that they will do both, but when someone is searching for a videographer and the first 4 they look at suck! they figure it's not worth the price. I've seen a bride not get video and horribly regret it later because she looked around at 4-5 places, but never hit the few quality videographers. She just assumed that what she saw was how all videos were and decided it wasn't worth it. That's just sad but it's a fact.

We all agree on one thing, poor quality hurts, and charging too little also does.

I have seen what Matt has too, but the other way. The videographer that thinks he can take stills and sell them. The dont know the difference in broad lighting and short lighting, the masculine or fem. pose etc, gives photography a bad name also.

This part of the business will probably never go away, like automobiles you have the Yugo and you have the Vette both will get you from point a to b but some in better style.

I am not trying to be a one stop shop, I just want to offer a service that is not being offered at all around here. That is decent quality video. I will admit I am by no means good, but already much better than what is available in this area.

Denny,
From what you've already said in your posts, it shows that you do understand the tools and techniques that make a great video and every aspect of it that is the same and different than photography. I'm definitely not saying you're trying to be a one stop shot...just wanted to make sure you didn't take it that way. I was referring to my own experiences with people around here.

:-) Matt

I think the most significant point Denny has made is the fact that while
it is getting much more difficult to impress as a photographer these days,
I feel its getting easier as a videographer.
Not because I am getting better, but because the tools at my disposal are.
Sure the nikon d3 is a fine machine. But I feel it only really becomes worth
the money on a football pitch at dusk with a 2.8 400mm lens attached.
At a wedding, however when the prints are only going to 10x8 max or even
only onto DVD its a lot harder for the layperson to distinguish the difference
between it and the shot done with the coolpix by Mom.
In fact , most of them wouldn't even care. The way they look in the
shot is what matters to them.
The photographers problem lies in the fact that mom didn't painstakingly gather up
the families, arrange the crying children & Make everybody smile and feel
like they are having a good
time. She just clicked the button. People fail to recognise this afterwards.
The pro videographer on the other hand, has the one essential tool the the
amateurs dont- the tripod.
That advantage was always there. To add to this is the new HD quality.
Im expecting the videographers role at a wedding to skyrocket, even overtake
the photographers, once HD becomes the norm. Seriously, my shots with this
xha1 are as well exposed and as sharp (on a hd screen) as the photog's shots.
And mine have movement!
Pull focus is such a beautiful technique that
stills can never emulate. it can be far more subtle now with hd.
My clients are over the moon these days beacuse Im taking the whole photography session out of context.
It's not at all the way it was on the day. I leave the groom complaining about the heat out. I
leave them kissing and cuddling in slowmo in.
Im in danger of waffling now so ill stop.
I think the point im trying to make is that instead of the b&g having to create a story
using the medium of a wedding album, I am creating one for them, one that they
are happy to be told.

I agree in principle to the above poster's sentiments about what he's doing with video; shaping a memory and making the day seem better than it really was. That pretty much the way I look at it also.
But there is something about photographs that is timeless unlike the medium of video. In 10 years, the looks we're using, the formats we're shooting, the styles of music and edit will all be dated. With photography this is less true. Sure the pictures may begin to feel dated due to the clothes people were wearing and the style of the particular photographer, but there is less context to make it feel dated, namely the music and style of shooting and edit.
Look at photos from the 80's and look at video from the 80's and tell me that the photos dont seem more immediate, more in tune, and slightly more warm and reminiscent. I think the reason for this is because a photo doesn't have sound, doesn't have motion, and can easily be removed or distanced from the original context, leaving you to assign your own new meaning to it. This isn't the case with video. If Uncle Charlie was dancing funny and saying something stupid cause he was drunk and acting like a fool, then you will see that unmistakably with video, but take a 1/60th of a second shot of that same moment, look at it 10 years later and will you remember it the same or will it just look like a younger Uncle Charlie with hair smiling and having a good time? With modern editing and storytelling techniques video can overcome this to a degree, but never to the extent that a photo can.
Those are my ramblings, hopefully they make sense to someone other than me.

Yes I agree with those points. I would like to respectfully argue with the point though that the photogrpaher will continue to have priority on the wedding day.
Mainly for the reason that these two mediums are heading towards merging.
The 7x5 prints from HD footage aren't bad at the moment.
The d3 shoots very fast fps.
My point is that if the wedding couple can choose HQ prints from the videos of the future then it's inevitable that video will take over.
Or maybe its just wishful thinking on my part :)

...but there is less context to make it feel dated, namely the music and style of shooting and edit.

Honestly, if I see another dutch angle or black and white section every 5th clip I'm gonna do something really bad.
I'm talking badder than Michael Jackson bad.

My point is that if the wedding couple can choose HQ prints from the videos of the future then it's inevitable that video will take over.
Or maybe its just wishful thinking on my part :)

Well, this is a video forum so your thoughts may be a bit biased. I wouldn't be surprised to see people offering this service in the future, but I still don't think a high quality frame grab is anywhere close to the type of shot a good photographer can get, just as a good photographer wouldn't have a clue about moving camera techniques or good editing.
Not every shot they do translated well to video, not every shot a videographer gets translates well to photo.

Honestly, if I see another dutch angle or black and white section every 5th clip I'm gonna do something really bad.
I'm talking badder than Michael Jackson bad.

I used to think this way too... then I realized the guys who were doing that style were making way more $$ than me. So I adapted and guess what? Business picked up. Sometimes change aint so bad.

I used to think this way too... then I realized the guys who were doing that style were making way more $$ than me. So I adapted and guess what? Business picked up. Sometimes change aint so bad.

***EDIT***
I should have said, sometimes being trendy ain't so bad. Maybe current is a better word than trendy but it sounds snobby in this context.

Denny,
From what you've already said in your posts, it shows that you do understand the tools and techniques that make a great video and every aspect of it that is the same and different than photography. I'm definitely not saying you're trying to be a one stop shot...just wanted to make sure you didn't take it that way. I was referring to my own experiences with people around here.

:-) Matt


Matt, I had not taken it that way, just wanted to make sure people knew I was by no means competeing for video business, only offering something that is not available at a professional level. The only video offered in this county that I know of was used at last years fair, and it was a small dv recorder, palm size on a walmart tripod, that was the extent of it. Never moved except panned a little during the talent part. The DVD given to the fair was like it was shot, no editing and skipped bad.
This is what made me decide to look into video.

Denis - regarding your comment

"no one I know has ever offered to show me a wedding video"

For my last wedding, I posted the B&G's highlight clip on a secure website (part of my service). I monitored well over 100 views in 30 days. I'm guessing they were able to share this video with as many people as they would a photo album, at least initially. The web changes the game....

Art

Denis - regarding your comment

"no one I know has ever offered to show me a wedding video"

For my last wedding, I posted the B&G's highlight clip on a secure website (part of my service). I monitored well over 100 views in 30 days. I'm guessing they were able to share this video with as many people as they would a photo album, at least initially. The web changes the game....

Art

Art, I was quoting someone else when I put that. I agree, the highlight show and the web does change everything.

Denis - regarding your comment

"no one I know has ever offered to show me a wedding video"

For my last wedding, I posted the B&G's highlight clip on a secure website (part of my service). I monitored well over 100 views in 30 days. I'm guessing they were able to share this video with as many people as they would a photo album, at least initially. The web changes the game....

Art


Hey Art; Question; This is sort of off subject but.

I have highlights posted on my website as well, I could easily make them secure and have give the link to my b&gs.

So did you recieve good feedback from doing this, and did you charge them for the service?

Video will soon if not now creat a decent enough image. I can take a pretty small file and with some processing in PS CS3 and my lab make a nice 11X14 canvas print.

The difference will be if the person behind the video camera will think like a photographer that second or period of time and make sure the lighting is perfect, the light falls accross the face lighting both eyes and making a triangle on the opposite cheek. This is what makes a portrait, not the background. This also makes for AWSOME video when lit so perfect, watch some old movies, or CMT, or VH1 videos and see what a difference lighting makes.

So if the good video guys continue to get better, and better equipment I see them being able to cut into the avearage photographers business by offering a good print and good quality video.

This is a good thing for those of you that are already good and for us photographers who still want to be in the game 10 years from now, its a good time to learn a new aspect of the business, especially if you truly love it.

I have highlights posted on my website as well, I could easily make them secure and have give the link to my b&gs.

So did you recieve good feedback from doing this, and did you charge them for the service?

Steven -I include the highlight video posting as part of standard package. No extra fee. Feedback from customers is very positive.

Steven -I include the highlight video posting as part of standard package. No extra fee. Feedback from customers is very positive.

Interesting, I must ponder what I want to do.

Pulling pretty good stills from video is an option with HD cameras - a little editing and they can look quite good. I wouldn't use 'em for the "money shots", but work fine for "2nd cam" perspective. Haven't had anyone notice yet, and in fact had complements on some! One that I composited from several cam angles actually was a favorite of the bride and groom (I hated it, but it was the only way to recreate "the kiss" since the groom dipped the bride without warning, and since the wedding was on a riverboat, there was no repositioning - had to go with the "b-cam footage".

I've talked to a few people who say they watch the video more often than they look at the pix... so the video has an appeal to SOME. Both are valid.


I guess using the DVD analogy - if the wedding video you deliver is "Gigli", not too likely anyone will watch it once (if that)... if it's "Titanic", or "Cars", or otherwise of high quality and compelling/enjoyable/exciting to watch, then you've got something!

What it comes down to is whether the final product is "a handycam on a Wally world tripod", or a quality mixed down, edited, color corrected rememberance of a special day. There's a difference.

I've seen some crappy photography work too, and I've seen stunning shooting, where I don't know the couple, but I can FEEL the moment in a good way, rather than noticing how bad the composition/color/exposure is.

The main challenge is getting paid well enough to create quality... and presenting it so that the client understands.

Steven,
Regarding your question, the web is an amazing marketing tool. We have always had our website and had demos on there, but this year I decided to start a blog. My advice to anyone: if you have time, do this!!! I do spend more time creating demos and highlights but the traffic has been unbelievable. I just see it as more advertising. Once I get done with a wedding, I will put together a highlights video or trailer so they have something until I get to their video a few weeks later. Then I send them the link to the blog and tell them to feel free to send it to anyone they want. Most of the brides have just gone crazy over this and I had one bride send it to over 100 people. You get a lot more views that you would without this and more people are then seeing your work. I have found that they are more interested soon after the wedding than a few months later so putting something up sooner than later has been a huge hit!

Brides that we're getting now have seen all that work and look forward to seeing their own so I'm getting a lot of returning traffic too. People that constantly follow up with what we're doing throughout the year.

Just something else to ponder :-)

Matt

Denis - regarding your comment

"no one I know has ever offered to show me a wedding video"

For my last wedding, I posted the B&G's highlight clip on a secure website (part of my service). I monitored well over 100 views in 30 days. I'm guessing they were able to share this video with as many people as they would a photo album, at least initially. The web changes the game....

Art

Art, did you find that bride and groom's preferred for this clip to be secure? I've been thinking of adding highlights for each wedding, but giving them an individual link, however other visitors can view the clip as well. This way killing two birds with one stone, using it as a demo to potential clients as well as letting all the family and friends see it.

Honestly, if I see another dutch angle or black and white section every 5th clip I'm gonna do something really bad.
I'm talking badder than Michael Jackson bad.

Man, I am with you. They have become synonymous with wedding videos. Whenever I watch someone else's work I have to half cover my eyes until I realize I won't be subjected to a poor man's DeBeer's commercial.

I always operate under the philosophy that the space and situation dictate how to shoot and how to edit, but most people videographers are less about reacting and observing than they are making sure they get all the dutch angles, etc.

If a video is gonna be rewatchable for the test of time, a connection must be made to the moment and the people. Style should be born out of necessity.
There shouldn't be an agenda.

The only thing over-stylization does for me is to distance me from being moved in any sincere way.

Alright, I'll get off my soapbox. I heard "dutch angle" and I started twitching.

Art, did you find that bride and groom's preferred for this clip to be secure? I've been thinking of adding highlights for each wedding, but giving them an individual link, however other visitors can view the clip as well. This way killing two birds with one stone, using it as a demo to potential clients as well as letting all the family and friends see it.

Quite frankly, I don't think secure/unsecure is an issue for most folks. I promote it that way just in case I get someone who is uncomfortable with the idea of letting anyone in the world view video of what is basically a private affair. One other advantage to keeping secure is that I'm able to better monitor traffic and actually see how many people the B&G shared with.

One other advantage to keeping secure is that I'm able to better monitor traffic and actually see how many people the B&G shared with.

I suppose that would be helpful as to how many people the B&G share the video with. At the same time, I think it would help to have them available as demos for couples looking. Unless you had a generic password for all the highlights and potentials email you for the password. That way you know how many people are looking at your site for your services.

... but I don't see how anyone can say that a frame grab, even a nicely shot hd frame grab can compare with a well shot still. Think of the differences in the cameras. Our prosumer HD cams don't have anywhere near the latitude of the good DSLR's that the photogs are using and the resolution isn't close either. Almost all of us are shooting highly compressed HDV or DVCProHD (or worse AVCHD) and the photogs are shooting Raw. Their image will be cleaner, bigger, sharper and better all the way around. Plus, they have the advantage of very slow shutters, fast lenses, and don't forget flashes. Video is at a serious technological disadvantage when compared to our still photographer counterparts. I just don't see how we as professionals can seriously sit here and say that we may one day do the job of two different fields at once. I for one don't think this should be a goal. I mean are there professional photographers that have these newer cameras that are capable of shooting decent quality video seriously thinking about flipping their camera into video mode for the ceremony and doing our jobs? I don't see how I'm the only voice saying it's ludicrous to think that one day people would just want frame grabs from their video in place of actual real pictures. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see it. And maybe it's just my personal bias. I mean I'm the guy that if a bride came to me and was torn between being able to afford video or photos I'd tell her to get good quality photography. That's what I'd rather have, and I'm a video guy.

I don't see how I'm the only voice saying it's ludicrous to think that one day people would just want frame grabs from their video in place of actual real pictures. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see it. And maybe it's just my personal bias. I mean I'm the guy that if a bride came to me and was torn between being able to afford video or photos I'd tell her to get good quality photography. That's what I'd rather have, and I'm a video guy.

I dont think this is where its headed but hear are some things to think about.

What about some frame grabs for the candids. (Many have used cheap disposable cameras for years for this)

How about Video until the formals. then switch over to a Pro DSLR for those, and a mix of video and DSLR for the reception. This is possible I feel

I saw on the Digital Wedding forum a while back an engagement session, my wife and I both thoght the images were nice, not great but nice. Then the shooter dropped the news, it was all taken with a cell phone. Proving its not the camera, its whos behind it.

I have printed some nice 5X7's that I worked up in photoshop, sharpened color corected etc. that were from a 3 year old cell phone. Don't under estimate the power of post processing and a good pro lab.

At the same time, I think it would help to have them available as demos for couples looking. Unless you had a generic password for all the highlights and potentials email you for the password. That way you know how many people are looking at your site for your services.

Yeah - in reality, the clips will ultimately end up on my public gallery page anyway as my contract gives me the right to use any material for promotional purposes. So as I rethink this process, open is better in the long run. Bottom line is that I want as many people as possible to watch that clip.

Mark,
you nailed exactly what I battle with every day. I am one of those that is only charging 1800 for our full day services and I am full time with this. Looking around in the industry, I do feel that I should be charging more for the quality of work i'm producing and amount of time I put into it, but this market won't support it. Trust me, I wish I could make more. I could raise my prices to 3000 but then I would only book a fraction of the weddings and then I have no money :-) we have videographers ranging from 400-2400 here and that is the problem...


...when someone is searching for a videographer and the first 4 they look at suck! they figure it's not worth the price. I've seen a bride not get video and horribly regret it later because she looked around at 4-5 places, but never hit the few quality videographers. She just assumed that what she saw was how all videos were and decided it wasn't worth it. That's just sad but it's a fact.

Hi Matt,

I feel your pain. We have not arrived, but we are making headway in our market. Our packages range from $3000-12000. The Tulsa metro area is about 800,000 and I see that Davenport proper is just under 100,000. Based on that, your market is much smaller than mine, even though mine is not that big. Here are some thoughts.

When we wanted to take our business full time the average price in our market was $800-1000. We realized that we could not let our competition set our prices, so we started pushing the quality and price envelope. We could have just settled for the average price, but I'm so glad we didn't. At those prices we could not spend the time to make a really nice video.

We looked at what the top photographers were charging and we decided to set some goals to hit those prices. What are the top photographers in your market charging?

I can totally relate to your statement about Brides seeing several bad videos and then just assume that all videos look like that, so why bother. We need to get the word out. Bridal shows, web video, Ipods, networking with other high end vendors...whatever it takes. Show great video to as many people as you can.

I have a good friend who lives in a smaller town than you. He does great work, but the reality is, there just isn't enough people that can afford good video in his market. So he started traveling to do video, as you have mentioned. It is working very well for him. If you do travel to larger cities, make sure you are being compensated properly. You could have a set of prices for your local market and another set of prices for traveling.

In both your local market and other markets make sure you have a range of packages that are not just a few hundred dollars apart. I don't know if you have prices on your website, but for instance, if you low package is $1800, your top package should not be $2400. Most people will gravitate towards the middle, but you will occasionally have clients who want the best, so you need to have an over the top package. In addition to that, the over the top package makes your middle package not seem so bad.

Whatever you do, just make sure you are being compensated for your time.

Very good post Mark, great pricing strategy.

In both your local market and other markets make sure you have a range of packages that are not just a few hundred dollars apart. I don't know if you have prices on your website, but for instance, if you low package is $1800, your top package should not be $2400. Most people will gravitate towards the middle, but you will occasionally have clients who want the best, so you need to have an over the top package. In addition to that, the over the top package makes your middle package not seem so bad.

Whatever you do, just make sure you are being compensated for your time.

Mark, what would you suggest as far as differences in price and options between packages, from the bottom, middle and up to the top? Would you more think if using the example of bottom package is $1800, that the middle package is around $2400? Then $3000 ish for the top package?

Thanks Mark! That was very helpful information. I think I am already in the process of doing a lot of what you've said. I currently have my prices on the website, but within a week or so I plan to take those off. It's always worked well for us but I don't think we'll be missing anything by not having them up there. Then I can get the correct price for other markets where I would be able to charge more.

As far as what you said about just being the best and providing the best product, I am working towards that goal too. I believe that our product is very strong even though we've been doing this less than three years. I am gradually raising prices and working to get to that top area, but at the same time setting a standard and working to become more recognized in the area. Obviously this just takes time but I do see progress and it appears to be working. We are booking up faster than most and people realize the quality difference.

I would also like to see what you think about pricing as the post above mentioned. If my middle package is 1800, where do you think my top should be ? In this market, there is a complete population of 380,000 with all cities combined so it's good enough to support this work, but I feel it's still a bit behind and people still see video as an extra if they have the money. We are working to change that as we have created a vidoegraphers association and are getting the word out a little more. I myself am using every outlet I can to advertise and get work out there for everyone to see what wedding videos really can be. The photographers here get an average of 3-5k for their weddings but I've yet to see a videographer make more than 2500. Obviously that is because we are all lower as a whole, but I can't do anything about the 50% that are charging under 1000...and the unfortunate part is that some of their work isn't worth more than that.

If we are going to spend 20-40 hours editing a wedding, we can't charge $1500 and make a profit.

I know this is an old debate, but if you could do one wedding video a week at $1500 for just 40 weeks per year that's $60K gross, which even after expenses is at least equal with the average U.S. household income. The problem wedding videographers face is getting enough business to keep things going when most couples still don't consider video a priority, plus it's a seasonal business with ~20-30 weeks/year of peak interest. But in spite of all this there are many videographers successfully charging several thousand dollars per event, so the potential is there to make a good living doing something a lot more fun than most "day jobs."

As far as video versus photography goes, neither one can replace the other but if you had to choose only one the sensible option would be video. Today's HD video cameras can generate decent frame grabs and you could make a printed wedding album that way if necessary, but you can't make a proper wedding video from photos. Plus it's a lot easier for a videographer to take a few formal photos to make a printed album than it is for a photographer to add all the complexities of producing a video, so if couples start looking for companies which can do both videographers will have an advantage there. Over time we should see professional videography grow in popularity while photo-only services dwindle somewhat because it doesn't make sense to pay so much for a few frozen images when you can get those plus video for a more sensible price.

or at least trying to. Also, I don't mean to come off as negative or argumentative. (If I am, then I'm expressing my ideas poorly; apologies for that, but the written word can really be a poor vehicle for communication).

I don't do many weddings; (I don't think I'm good enough yet to rival the existing competition in my area, so I don't compete in that arena), but here are some additional, though maybe impractical, thoughts for marketing:

- for an over-the-top wedding package, would it be entirely impractical to offer a highlights DVD as "favors" for guests? (It would require someone to burn and print x number of DVDs in the course of the reception, but would, IMO, be more memorable - and considerably more expensive - than a book of matches, etc., and could lead to more clients). There would probably be few takers for such a package, but it would certainly be "over-the-top" for a very high-end client. Something like Microboards GX Disc Publisher might be useful for such a job, with a copy of the invitation as a cover and/or case insert.

- for video frames-as-prints, I've read that DVRACK (or whatever Adobe is calling it now) can create a frame grab in the same res as is being captured by the camera, then eventually printed. Example: if shot in HD, directly via DVRACK, supposedly nothing of the video frame is lost thru compression. Assuming the frame(s) captured were composed decently, would/could these result in better-than-acceptable prints, even after cropping? Has anyone tried that yet? I don't have DVRACK, and I know that presently means capturing directly to a laptop, (which is no fun to lug around), but might be doable during the ceremony. (If we ever see something the size of an iPhone with full laptop performance, maybe this, or some semblance of it, is the future convergence tool for video and stills)?

- for those slow periods during the year, have any of you contacted prior clients who may have only a VHS recording of their wedding and attempted to sell a re-edit and/or conversion to DVD package? The market would be as big/small as your prior clientele, minus divorces and deaths, and I suspect there would be few takers, even in light of the looming demise of VHS. But, a freshly burned and/or edited DVD could make a great, romantic, wedding anniversary gift (particularly from a husband to a wife) and might garner some income during the slow periods. Remember, too, that Valentine's Day is fast approaching, and while flowers are nice, they dry up and eventually end up in the trash. This could be a great, different, and emotion-filled gift after many years of marriage. I wonder if this might be an easy sell to husbands, as it would relieve them of much of the "pressure" of finding a gift.

If none of these ideas make sense, please pardon my ramblings. I'm in an "off mood" today, and am doing some "wishful thinking" (as in "wishing I had more work"), and I have a tendency towards ideas that are bigger but maybe impractical. (Something my family has learned to politely suffer through. Thanks for your patience in doing the same).

never be hesitant to throw out a few ideas on this forum Denis,
that is exactly why we are here, to swap ideas and ultimately reinvent the wheel. Particularly in a post like this.

Earlier I mentioned how I felt the video framegrab would/could someday replace the photos.
Just to clarify, I wasn't talking about now, as the technology currently stands. Even though its technically possible nowadays.

Surely its obvious to most of you that there is a merging of both mediums taking place? Thats exactly whats happening with the release of every new model. I personally think its crazy for anyone not to see the eventual 'priority shift' from the stills camera to the videocamera on the day. Or to argue with myself, even if the stills camera always has the edge over the video cam, its only a matter of time before the video cam reaches acceptable levels for wedding production. I don't believe for one second that 1080p is as far as this thing is going to go.
Sure, there will still be a need for an 'organiser', possibly a better paying role than either photog or videog today!
Apologies for the predicting, Im aware of some other more useful strains within this post taking place.

Photographing an event and videotaping and event are 2 totally different disciplines, and not because video cameras have inferior resolutions. Even if they were equal in pixel count, sensors etc, they are still different beasts with different philosophies.

I am not saying that you cannot get wonderful stills from a videocamera, you obviously can. But lets not go overboard. I think we should respect photographers enough, and be modest enough to know that technology is not what separates a photographer from a videographer.

This is coming from a videographer.

Great opinions, and I like anyone like to hear both sides of the story. It is funny how I as a photographer feel different not protecting my background and some of you as video guys not claiming video can do all. Guess this just shows that it is not a ego thing, but how we feel.

I will say I used to be a huge believer in that you need HUGE files. I always upgraded DSLR's to get the most pixels. I am now shooting with 2 1 the 5D and 1D Mk III. The 5D cost around $2500 and has a 12.8 mp image. The 1D Mk III is a pro camera and cost around $4500 and is only 10.1 MP. Now with both using the same lens, I can not tell a difference in print quality up to size 20X30. The 5D has a larger sensor but the 1D is better built, and mush faster but image quality is undetectable.

I once thought I would be safe putting small images on my website, since you couldnt right click on them to "save as" and they were so small. Well boy was I surprised when a buddy showed up with a really nice 8X10 of one of my images, just to show me it could be done.

I realized then technoligy will always humble me.

Mark, what would you suggest as far as differences in price and options between packages, from the bottom, middle and up to the top? Would you more think if using the example of bottom package is $1800, that the middle package is around $2400? Then $3000 ish for the top package?

Hi Matt,

Options are going to depend on the timeline of the wedding days in your market. In some markets, 6 hours of time is not nearly enough and other markets, 6 hours of time is too much, so it really just depends on the local customs and timeline of the day.

$1800-2400-3000 would be a good place to start. You need to make sure that when the client goes from 1800 to 2400 they are getting a good bang for their buck, but more importantly, you must make sure that you are making a good return on your time for the extra $600. I say that because it is more important for you to make a good return on your time. If you are not making a profit, you will go out of business. That is unless of course you have another source of income.

$1800 should give them just enough coverage time to get the bare minimum. In my market, 4 hours of coverage time will cover the bare minimum. It may be different in your market. Then perhaps $2400 gets them another 2-3 hours of coverage. Just don't give them double the hours and throw in the kitchen sink for an extra $600.

Thanks Mark! That was very helpful information. I think I am already in the process of doing a lot of what you've said. I currently have my prices on the website, but within a week or so I plan to take those off...

I would also like to see what you think about pricing as the post above mentioned. If my middle package is 1800, where do you think my top should be ? In this market, there is a complete population of 380,000 with all cities combined so it's good enough to support this work, but I feel it's still a bit behind and people still see video as an extra if they have the money. We are working to change that as we have created a vidoegraphers association and are getting the word out a little more. I myself am using every outlet I can to advertise and get work out there for everyone to see what wedding videos really can be. The photographers here get an average of 3-5k for their weddings but I've yet to see a videographer make more than 2500.

Hi Matt,

You are welcome. It always been a debate to whether you should or should not have your prices on your website. If you want to sell brides on a cheap price, then you should have your prices listed, or if you have more business than you can handle and don't want to qualify Brides over the phone, then list your prices and let your website qualify the Bride.

If you are on the upper range of the market you may not want to list your prices. I say that because I want the Bride to look at my work first. If she loves my work, she may be willing to pay my price. If she sees my price first, then she may not even bother to look at my work.

If your middle package is $1800, then I say raise it. Seriously. Maybe you don't raise it tomorrow, but that middle package needs to go up, especially if the photographers are getting 3-5K. The photographer have already proven that there is some money in your market.

I'm going to cheat a little, and you will know what I mean, but here is a way to look at pricing. If you are pricing yourself too low, you can't just double or triple prices overnight. So what can your do? Go up gradually. What is your goal for the total number of weddings in 2008? When you have hit 40-50% of that goal take your prices up a few hundred dollars. If you have already booked more than 50% of your goal, then go up more than a few hundred dollars. The higher up you go the less you will usually book, but you don't have to book as many at higher prices. Do you really want to be away from your family every weekend?

You mentioned your local video association. That is great that a market your size has a video assocation. That can be a very good thing.

You also mentioned that you are using every oultet you can to get the work out, but I haven't seen you mention Wedding Day Edits, also known as, Same Day Edits. If you have not done a WDE, you need to. It's a great marketing tool. It's a wonderful way to show your work to 200-400 of the Brides closest friends on a large screen. It's also great marketing with other vendors.

I know this is an old debate, but if you could do one wedding video a week at $1500 for just 40 weeks per year that's $60K gross, which even after expenses is at least equal with the average U.S. household income.

Hi Kevin,

We will probably have to agree to disagree, but there is not much left to support a family on the net of a $60K gross. Between monthly business expenses, taxes, insurance, savings and not to mention replacing equipment and growing your business.

Now if you have another source of income from a spouse or an additional income and your video income only supplements the household income, then that is a different story.

...for an over-the-top wedding package, would it be entirely impractical to offer a highlights DVD as "favors" for guests? (It would require someone to burn and print x number of DVDs in the course of the reception, but would, IMO, be more memorable - and considerably more expensive - than a book of matches, etc., and could lead to more clients). There would probably be few takers for such a package, but it would certainly be "over-the-top" for a very high-end client. Something like Microboards GX Disc Publisher might be useful for such a job, with a copy of the invitation as a cover and/or case insert...

Hi Dennis,

That is a great idea. We have done that twice after creating a Wedding Day Edit. With our own client, they booked a WDE and then ordered 200 DVDs as Thank You's for their guests, which were given out before the end of the reception. We charged $5.00 a disc, in addition to the WDE fee.

We did a WDE for another videographer and he sold 200 Thank You DVDs to the B&G to be handed out to the guests at the reception for $10 each. The Bride liked the WDE so much that she bought another 200 WDE DVDs to send to people who did not come to the wedding. That was a gross of $4000 in just Thank You DVDs. At the same time, it was great advertising for the videographer.

I would love to get setup to do a SDE. I can have the equipment and pull it off in most situations, but when it's hard to get the brides to pay for the product, how do you get them to throw on an extra like that and upsell them on it.

I would love to hear your opinion and anyone else that's doing these on how you got started doing them. I feel that when I watch SDE from other people, they almost have a different kind of couple than I typically see here. Most people here would see that as something that is not needed at all. Again I mentioned before that video is still something that is not needed, but added if you have the money.

Now I'm not trying to come out here and act like I can't get any money and that everyone is cheap. We do book 30 each year and do very well, but you're right that there is more money because they do see the need for the photography here. I just need to find the right formula in getting the work for what it's worth and helping to educate and develop a new mentality on how they see this service....and all of this is helping a lot. The wheels are turning! I appreciate everyone's help and comments.

I would love to get setup to do a SDE. I can have the equipment and pull it off in most situations, but when it's hard to get the brides to pay for the product, how do you get them to throw on an extra like that and upsell them on it.


Now I'm not trying to come out here and act like I can't get any money and that everyone is cheap. We do book 30 each year and do very well, but you're right that there is more money because they do see the need for the photography here. I just need to find the right formula in getting the work for what it's worth and helping to educate and develop a new mentality on how they see this service....and all of this is helping a lot. The wheels are turning! I appreciate everyone's help and comments.

Hi Matt,

I feel your pain. Upselling a Bride on a WDE can be a challenge, especially when the Brides total budget for video is less than $2k. I have seen WDE prices from $500-2000. We charge local Brides $1000. It seems like the videographers in big markets with big budgets have an easier time selling WDEs.

To help in selling a WDE, you could try doing one for free. You want to select a couple who will have a nice ceremony and reception. You also want to select a couple who is likely to friends who can afford your services.

One of the conditions for doing the WDE at no charge is that the couple will do two things. One, give you an interview after watching it. Two, send the link that you will provide of the WDE, to their friends.

You need to have two cameras rolling during the WDE presentation. One on the couple, of course from a distance and the other one from the back or the room, showing the WDE being projected. Roll cameras all through the presentation as well as for the applause after the presentation.

You can put together an edit from this footage and use it to sell WDE's to future Brides. Many Brides can't appreciate the value of a WDE, so it's up to you to show them the value.